common inspection framework 2012 consultation

8/3/2019 Common Inspection Framework 2012 Consultation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/common-inspection-framework-2012-consultation 1/32

Common Inspection Framework 2012Consultation document – proposals for revised inspection arrangements for further

education and skills providers from September 2012

Published: September 2011

Reference no: 110070



The Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted) regulates and inspects to

achieve excellence in the care of children and young people, and in education and skills for learners of

all ages. It regulates and inspects childcare and children's social care, and inspects the Children and

Family Court Advisory Support Service (Cafcass), schools, colleges, initial teacher training, work-basedlearning and skills training, adult and community learning, and education and training in prisons and

other secure establishments. It assesses council children’s services, and inspects services for looked

after children, safeguarding and child protection.

If you would like a copy of this document in a different format, such as large print or Braille, please

telephone 0300 123 1231, or email [email protected] .

You may reuse this information (not including logos) free of charge in any format or medium, under

the terms of the Open Government Licence. To view this licence, visit

www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/, write to the Information Policy Team,

The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected] .

This publication is available at www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/110070.

To receive regular email alerts about new publications, including survey reports and school inspection

reports, please visit our website and go to ‘Subscribe’.

Piccadilly Gate

Store Street

Manchester

M1 2WD

T: 0300 123 1231

Textphone: 0161 618 8524

E: [email protected] W: www.ofsted.gov.uk

No. 110070

© Crown copyright 2011



Contents

Introduction 4 Background to the consultation 5

Summary of the main proposals 6 Proposals to revise the Common Inspection Framework 8

Overall effectiveness 8 Outcomes for learners 8 The quality of teaching, learning and assessment 9 The effectiveness of leadership and management 10 Inspection of subject areas 13 Inspection proportionate to risk 13 Dealing with requests to inspect providers 15

The consultati on process 16 What happens next? 16 Sending back your questionnaire 17

Questionnaire for the Common Inspection Framework 2012 consultation 18 What did you think of this consultation? 29

Additional questions about you 31



Common Inspection Framework 20 12 – consultation documentSeptember 2011, No. 110070

4

Introduction

As a result of the 2006 Education and Inspections Act, Ofsted took over responsibility

for inspecting the provision for further education and skills. Since then, we haveinspected further education colleges, work-based learning providers, adult andcommunity learning (ACL) provision, offender learning and skills, and Next Stepprovision. Inspections are all based on the Common Inspection Framework forfurther education and skills,1 which applies to education and training in England forlearners over the age of 16, except those in school sixth forms or higher education.

Ofsted’s Strategic Plan 2011–152 states that Ofsted will ‘streamline and simplify theCommon Inspection Framework so as to focus it on areas that have most impact’.We now propose to revise the inspection framework for the further education andskills sector, which will result in more focused inspections with fewer judgements andgrades, leading to reports on the most important aspects of learning and skillsprovision.

The Common Inspection Framework for further education and skills is devised by HerMajesty’s Chief Inspector (HMCI) in line with the Education and Inspections Act 2006and informs all of Ofsted’s further education and skills inspections.3 It sets out the

judgements that inspectors will make during the inspection of education and trainingin England for learners over the age of 16, except those in school sixth forms orhigher education.

We have received positive feedback on the current framework from learners,stakeholders, providers, employers and inspectors. In light of this positive feedback,we propose to review and improve the framework, rather than radically change it.The framework has a strong influence on learning and skills providers and we do notchange it lightly.

This consultation invites your views on our proposed changes to help us shape therevised inspection arrangements, which, subject to the successful passage of theEducation Bill, will commence in September 2012.

The consultation runs from 1 September until 24 November 2011.

1 The further education and skills sector is a generic term for all provision in the learning and skillssector. This includes colleges, work-based learning providers, adult and community learning provision,offender learning and skills and Next Step provision. Ofsted inspects providers in England fundedwholly or partly by the Young People’s Learning Agency (YPLA) or the Skills Funding Agency (SFA).2 Raising standards, improving lives: The Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills Strategic Plan 2011–2015 (110001), Ofsted, 2011; www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/110001.

3 In accordance with section 133 of the Education and Inspections Act 2006, it is a requirement thatHMCI devises a framework applicable to inspections conducted under chapter three of the Educationand Skills Act 2006 (inspection of further education and training). A framework is defined as acommon set of principles applicable to inspections.

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/110001

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/110001




5

Background to the consultation

In proposing revisions, we have taken into account changing government policyincluding the 2011 Education Bill and the schools White Paper The importance of teaching .4 This includes:

differences between pre- and post-19 learning; government changes drivingseparate approaches to the commissioning and funding of learning mayrequire separate judgements on outcomes for these two different groups of learners

greater further education reforms and freedoms; recently publishedproposals from the Department for Business Innovation and Skills signal theintention that further education and skills providers will be able to choosewhat they want to deliver from a menu of publicly subsidised learning, andeven which types of customers they aim to serve

the potential exemption of outstanding providers from routine inspectionunless their performance drops

increased self-regulation, which will require more assurance from inspectionthat the system has the capacity to improve itself and to self-regulate, andthat learners and employers will continue to be well served

the empowerment of learners, employers and parents; this greateremphasis will demand more attention to be paid to the interaction betweenusers and services

the rising importance of meeting the needs of the local community for manyproviders in the further education and skills system where they are keyplayers in the delivery of local priorities; this will require inspectionoutcomes that relate to a provider’s contribution to their area’s priorities

the critical importance of employability skills and progression towardssustainable employment and further learning as outcomes from manygovernment-funded programmes, and the need to judge this alongside theachievement of learners

the introduction of new, more flexible qualifications where it may not bepossible to measure outcomes in the traditional ways over easily definedtimescales

the Comprehensive Spending Review and the need to reduce the costs of inspection and focus more proportionately on those providers whoseperformance is inadequate or failing to improve quickly enough.

4 The importance of teaching – the schools White Paper 2010 , DfE, 2010;https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationdetail/page1/CM%207980.

https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationdetail/page1/CM%207980

https://www.education.gov.uk/publications/standard/publicationdetail/page1/CM%207980



Summary of the main proposals

Inspection should concentrate on the aspects that have most impact on improving

outcomes for learners. The changes we are proposing will focus more sharply on thecore purpose of the provider, with an even closer examination of teaching andlearning, together with an evaluation of the impact of leadership. This will providelearners, employers and parents with reports that show more clearly how providersare performing their key functions.

We intend to continue to do those things that we believe work well and will still: takeaccount of providers’ self assessment; involve senior staff in the inspection process;and listen carefully to the views of learners, employers, staff and, where appropriate,parents when coming to a judgement about the provider’s effectiveness. We willcontinue to make clear recommendations for the provider’s improvement.

We have moved progressively over the years to be more proportionate and to targetinspection where it will make the most difference. Our proposals here introduce newarrangements for providers exempt from inspection and an increased emphasis onpromoting improvement in weaker providers.

We propose to align the Common Inspection Framework more closely with theinspection framework and guidance for schools to enable students and their parentsto make easy comparisons and more informed choices.

From September 2012, we propose that learning and skills inspections will:

report on the quality of provision of the further education and skills sector,giving priority to the following key headline grades to determine theoverall effectiveness of the provider: outcomes for learners; the qualityof teaching, learning and assessment; and the quality of leadership andmanagement of the provider (see paragraph 2)

report on outcomes for learners and the extent to which the provisionmeets the needs and ensures the achievement of all learners, and helpsthem progress into employment or further education and training (see

paragraphs 3–5) judge the achievement of all learners, taking particular account of the

success and rates of progress of different individuals and groups of learners (see paragraphs 3–5)

promote higher standards for learners by focusing more on the quality of teaching, learning and assessment (see paragraphs 6–9)

judge the effectiveness of leadership and management with aparticular attention to the leadership of teaching and learning (seeparagraphs 10 and 11)

regard capacity to improve as implicit in leadership effectiveness andnot make a separate judgement on this (see paragraph 12)


6




7

report on equality and diversity under the three key headlines of:outcomes for learners; teaching, learning and assessment; and leadershipand management (see paragraphs 13 and 14)

continue to take account of self-assessment evidence, however it ispresented by the provider (see paragraph 17)

judge whether a provider is managing safeguarding arrangements toensure that all learners are safe (see paragraph 15)

continue to inspect a sample of subject areas but refer to these areasspecifically in the body of the report rather than reporting separately (seeparagraphs 18 and 19)

assess the performance and other risk factors of all providers on an

annual basis in order to make fully informed decisions about when aprovider should be inspected (see paragraphs 20 and 21)

take greater account of the view s of learners, employers, parentsand carers in deciding when a provider should be inspected (seeparagraphs 21 and 26)

Prioritise inspection where it is most needed by:

ceasing the routine inspection of most of those judged to beoutstanding providers at their last inspection, unless theirperformance drops (see paragraphs 20 and 21)

inspecting those previously judged as good providers within six yearsof their last inspection (see paragraph 20)

strengthening the monitoring and inspection of satisfactory providers including introducing the possibility of unannounced monitoringinspections of some providers who have failed to improve over anumber of inspections (see paragraphs 22 and 23)

targeting inspection to bring about more rapid improvement in those judged to be inadequate providers (see paragraph 24)

respond more flexibly to requests made by providers for an inspection(see paragraphs 25–29).



Proposals to revise the Common Inspection Framework

1. In the following sections, we discuss and seek views on the approach we

propose to take to inspecting and judging each of the main aspects to be reported.

Overall effectiveness

2. We will continue to arrive at a judgement about the quality of the provision andthe overall effectiveness of the provider.

Judgements will continue to be made against the following scale:

Grade 1 – Outstanding

Grade 2 – Good

Grade 3 – Satisfactory

Grade 4 – Inadequate.

Currently, the Common Inspection Framework awards four headline grades,plus an overall effectiveness grade, as follows:

capacity to improve

outcomes for learners

quality of provision

leadership and management.

We propose to continue to judge the quality of the provider in terms of its overalleffectiveness, but based particularly on judgements relating to:


the quality of teaching, learning and assessment

the effectiveness of leadership and management (incorporating capacity

to improve).

To what extent do you agree or disagree with our proposed overarching gradeand three key headline grades?

Outcomes for learners

3. Currently, the judgement about outcomes for learners has a headline grade andup to seven contributory grades. We wish to focus even more closely on learners’ achievement, and their progression to higher level qualifications and into sustainable

jobs. We propose that outcomes for learners has a single grade.


8



4. The inspection of outcomes is important because persistent patterns of lowachievement affect learners’ life chances, and have a deep and damaging impact onfamilies and communities. Inspectors will focus even more on providers’ success in

closing the achievement gap for particular groups of learners.

5. Achievement gaps between some groups remain stubbornly large. We shallexamine any differences of achievement between groups in the provider. These maybe between learners from different social and ethnic groups and between males andfemales.

We propose to judge outcomes for learners by giving particular attention tohow well:

all learners achieve

gaps are narrowing between different groups of learners

learners develop personal, social and employability skills

learners progress to higher level qualifications and into jobs that meetlocal and national needs.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with our proposed approach to judgingoutcomes for learners?

The quality of teaching, learning and assessment

6. The quality of provision is largely reflected in the quality of teaching, learningand assessment. We intend for the revised framework, criteria and inspectionmethodology to place greater emphasis on direct observation of teaching, learning,skills development and assessment. This will help inspectors to form more incisive

judgements of the quality of teaching and its impact on learning and progress.

7. We intend to continue to deploy subject specialist inspectors. Where teachingand learning are judged to be good or outstanding, we find strong subjectknowledge together with effective teaching of the skills needed to learn andunderstand a subject effectively. Assessment of learning and progress is used well toinform subsequent teaching. Constructive dialogue and feedback between staff andlearners help learners make progress. Good teaching and learning are alsocharacterised by careful attention to the learning needs of individuals, highexpectations and challenge for learners, and opportunities for them to develop andextend their learning. This is why we propose to continue to deploy subject specialistinspectors to focus on these aspects and take into consideration subject knowledgeand the use of assessment as key contributory factors in judging the quality of teaching.


9



8. We shall evaluate the promotion of equality and diversity through teaching,learning and assessment, and the behaviour and attitudes of learners and staff.

9.

We propose only to award a headline grade for the quality of teaching, learningand assessment, dispensing with contributory grades. This one grade will take intoaccount the impact of care, guidance, and support for learning. We recognise thatwhere the curriculum is carefully designed, flexible and caters well for the range of needs, abilities and interests of the learners, motivation is increased and outcomesare better. How well the curriculum meets the needs and interests of learners will beconsidered as an aspect of leadership and management.

We propose to judge the quality of teaching, learning and assessment bygiving particular attention to how well:

staff demonstrate high expectations, enthuse, engage, support andmotivate learners so that they learn and make progress

staff set challenging tasks, build on and extend learning for all learners

staff have appropriate skills and expertise to provide good qualityteaching, learning, assessment and support for each learner

staff assess learners’ progress and provide for a range of needsincluding those learners with learning difficulties and/or disabilities

equality and diversity are promoted through teaching and learning

teaching develops literacy, numeracy, language and functional skills,independent and lifelong learning to support the achievement of learning goals

learning is effectively supported by appropriate and timely information,and advice and guidance on next steps in training, education andemployment.

To what extent do you agree or disagree that inspectors should judge the qualityof teaching, learning and assessment as proposed above?

The effectiveness of leadership and management

10. Leadership is second only to the quality of teaching in the impact it can have onlearners’ progress. We propose to focus more sharply on how well leadership andmanagement improve the quality of teaching and learning, and raise learners’ aspirations and achievements. Expectations on governors should be clear as theyhave a crucial role in challenging the provision and ensuring that it improves. Wepropose to retain these as key considerations when judging the effectiveness of

leadership and management.


10




11

11. We propose to take into account the professional development of staff and thesupport they receive to improve their teaching. Effective leaders monitor teachingand learning rigorously, and track learners’ progress meticulously, drawing on the

outcomes in order to target areas where improvements are urgently needed. Theirhigh aspirations, clear direction and attention to professional support anddevelopment build morale amongst all staff. Leadership responsibility is shared andstaff members work as an efficient, cohesive team.

12. At present we award an overall grade for leadership and management, and afurther grade for capacity to improve. We are proposing that in the revisedframework, capacity to improve is subsumed in leadership and management. Wewould focus on the effectiveness of leadership and management at all levels inmeeting the needs and interests of learners, raising expectations, promotingambition and achieving high standards.

13. We propose to continue to consider equality of opportunity in every aspect of the inspection framework, but specifically take account of how effectively leaders andmanagers discharge this fundamental responsibility. We propose to remove the

‘limiting’ contributory grade and report paragraph on equality and diversity fromleadership and management, replacing it with text in each of the three key headlinegrades (outcomes for learners; the quality of teaching, learning and assessment; andleadership and management). We will place greater emphasis on the impact forlearners and reduce the focus on policies and procedures.

14.

We know that in learning and skills provision, promotion and management of equality and diversity are important to learners’ success. Learners cannot achievewell unless individual needs are met, the provider is inclusive, and equality anddiversity are promoted well. Therefore, we want to focus the revised methodologyeven more closely on the impact of equality and diversity on learners. At the core of this is a sharp focus on the progress that all individuals and groups of learners aremaking over time, and whether providers are effectively narrowing the gap inachievement between potentially vulnerable learners and their peers. This keyresponsibility for leaders and managers reflects the raised expectations nationally toaddress disadvantage, to target support to those who need it and to have a greaterimpact on narrowing gaps in outcomes for learners.

15. We propose not to continue to include a ‘limiting grade’ for safeguarding. Weare proposing to judge and report on whether a provider is meeting their statutorysafeguarding responsibilities in leadership, taking into account the impact on learnersof the provider’s safety and safeguarding arrangements.



16. Under the new further education reforms and freedoms all providers candetermine their own curriculum. We propose to inspect how well the curriculummeets the needs and interests of learners and the local community, and evaluate this

as part of leadership and management. Providers should demonstrate their work with employers to offer courses that are proven to lead to employment. How welllearners progress into work will be judged under outcomes for learners.

17. Effective leaders focus on developing and improving consistently good teachingand learning. Key to this is seeking and using feedback from learners to improveinstruction. They stay focused on the aspects of teaching that make most differenceto learning and progress. The ability to self-assess accurately and self-critically andto use self-assessment to constantly drive improvement will remain an importantaspect.

We propose to evaluate the extent to which leadership and m anagement including, where relevant, governors:

raise expectations, promote ambition for learners and improve theiroutcomes

improve teaching and learning

ensure the appropriateness of the provision, including the curriculum inmeeting the needs and interests of learners, employers and the localand national community

deploy resources, including staff, accommodation, facilities andtechnologies to support learning effectively and provide value for money

evaluate the provision through monitoring quality, includingengagement with users and using their findings to make, promote andsustain improvement

actively promote equality and diversity, tackle discrimination and narrowany achievement gaps

ensure the safeguarding and well-being of all learners.

To what extent do you agree or disagree that inspectors should judge theeffectiveness of leadership and management as proposed above?

To what extent do you agree or disagree that capacity to improve is adequatelyrepresented by a judgement on the quality of leadership and management?

To what extent do you agree or disagree with our proposed approach to judgingequality and diversity?


12



Inspection of subject areas

18. Currently, we inspect and report on a sample of a provider’s subject areas. Wepropose that although sampling will continue, grades and reports will be contained inthe main section of our report rather than as separate sections for some of thesubject areas offered by a provider. In addition, we propose that individual sectorsubject areas will be the focus of national thematic studies as part of our programmeof survey reports. This will enable us to evaluate the quality of provision across awider range of providers, including outstanding providers who are likely to beexempt from full inspection.

19. Inspecting subject areas adds real depth to inspection findings and helpsinspectors make clear judgements on how effectively leadership and management,and policies and procedures impact on learning. The use of subject specialist

inspectors means Ofsted can accurately identify how good the quality of teachingand learning is in the subject areas inspected.

We propose that we will:

continue to inspect a sample of subject areas, and that subjectspecialist inspectors increase their focus on teaching and learning

evaluate the outcomes for learners and the teaching and learning insubject areas

award a grade for teaching and learning overall, which will be supportedby our detailed findings on teaching and learning in subject areas

stop writing a report on each of the subject areas sampled throughinspection.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with our proposals to inspect and reporton subject areas?

Inspection proportionate to risk

20. The schools White Paper proposes that Ofsted will adopt a highly proportionateapproach to inspection. Subject to the successful passage of the Education Bill, theroutine inspection of providers previously judged to be outstanding will stop andinspection will only occur if there is evidence of significant decline in performance.Providers that were judged to be good at their previous inspection will continue to beinspected at approximately six-year intervals, unless we have concerns about theirperformance.


13



21. We currently assess the performance and other risk factors of all providers onan annual basis, regardless of their last inspection judgement, in order to makeinformed decisions about when a particular provider should be inspected. We

propose to establish a secure web-based system for gathering the views of learners,employers and parents/carers between inspections and will ensure that these viewsare taken into consideration as part of risk assessment. We intend to devote a higherproportion of our resources to poorly performing provision. The White Paper asksOfsted to differentiate within the broad ‘satisfactory’ category, between schools thatare improving and have good capacity to improve further, and those that are ‘stuck’.We intend to do adopt the same approach for further education and skills providers.

Satisfactory not improving providers

22. We currently inspect satisfactory providers every four years. Satisfactory

providers with a grade of satisfactory or inadequate for capacity to improve will alsohave received a monitoring visit two years after their last inspection. Despite theseadditional visits, the slow progress of some satisfactory providers remains a concern.Some satisfactory providers appear to be ‘stuck’ and unable to take the stepsnecessary to bring about clear and sustained improvements.

23. In the future, a previously satisfactory provider where a decline in performanceis identified, or a provider that has been judged satisfactory in each of its last twoinspections, will also be likely to have an additional unannounced monitoring visit. If the monitoring visit identifies that the provider has not made adequate progress in

making improvements, or there are serious concerns over progress, then a fullinspection will be brought forward.

Inadequate providers

24. Currently, providers judged inadequate at their last inspection will receive amonitoring visit within 6–8 months of the inspection and then be re-inspected after12–15 months. We propose to continue to do this.


14



We propose to:

adopt a more targeted approach to satisfactory and inadequate

providers , giving priority to undertaking monitoring visits tosatisfactory providers where leadership and management was no betterthan satisfactory or where the areas for improvement include key areassuch as outcomes

bring forward a full inspection if the monitoring visit suggests that theprovider has made limited progress in improving its performance

establish a secure web-based system for gathering the views of learners, employers and parents/ carers between inspections, andto ensure that these views are taken into consideration in all risk assessments.

To what extent do you agree or disagree that we should move to devoting agreater proportion of inspection effort to satisfactory and inadequate providers?

Dealing w ith requests to inspect providers

25. The Education Bill provides HMCI with additional powers to agree to requestsfor providers, including schools, to be inspected and, in some circumstances, to

charge a fee for such an inspection. Ofsted will welcome requests for inspection andit will be for HMCI to decide whether and when to inspect the provider. Weanticipate that there will be two broad reasons for such requests.

Requests to inspect because of concerns about the provider

26. Requests for inspection may relate to concerns about a provider’s performance,for example, a marked decline in success rates or a significant deterioration in thequality of teaching and learning. Such concerns may be raised by a group of learners, employers, parents or governors. It will be for HMCI to consider thereasons for such requests, in coming to a decision about whether to inspect the

provider.

Requests from a provider to be inspected

27. It is possible that some providers that were previously judged to be outstandingand are exempted from routine inspection might ask to be inspected. Ofsted willwelcome such requests but it will be for HMCI to decide whether and when toinspect the provider.


15



28. A good provider that has improved significantly since its previous inspectionmay feel that there is compelling evidence that it might be judged outstanding wereit to be inspected. Where a future routine inspection will not take place for another

two or three years, the provider may request an inspection. It will be for HMCI todecide whether and when to inspect the provider.

29. Given that such requests are made by providers themselves, we think that it isreasonable to charge a fee for such inspections. We anticipate that these inspectionswould be unannounced and that this would be acceptable to the providers given thatthey had requested them. We also anticipate that at least two years would havepassed since the provider’s last inspection before a request for another inspectioncould be considered.

We propose that Ofsted will welcome requests for inspection and it will be forHMCI to decide whether and when to inspect the provider. The Education Billprovides HMCI with additional powers to agree to requests for schools andproviders to be inspected and to charge a fee for such an inspection.

To what extent do you agree or disagree that Ofsted should respond positively tomost requests for inspection and charge for such inspections?

The consultation process30. We welcome your responses to the consultation questionnaire below and yourviews on any aspect of the inspection of further education and skills providers.Please use the comments section in the questionnaire to raise any additional pointsnot covered by our questions. The consultation remains open until 24 November2011.

31. We will meet with representative groups from the sector and, if possible, withlearners, employers, parents and carers who have been involved in the sector.

What happens next?

32. During 2012 we will try out our proposals, evaluate them and publish regularinformation on our website as the revised arrangements develop. We aim to ensurethat the process is as clear and open as possible, so that people can see that theirviews have been considered and are aware of the changes that we decide to make.

33. We will publish a revised framework and evaluation schedule for the inspectionof the further education and skills sector, taking full account of the responses to thisconsultation. We will publish a report on the responses to this consultation.


16




17

Sending back your questionnaire

34. There are three ways of completing and submitting the questionnaire in thenext section and/or sending us your comments.

Online electronic questionna ire

35. You can complete and submit an electronic version of the questionnaire:http://85.234.135.179/index.php?sid=77156.

Print and post

36. This document can be printed and completed by hand. When you havecompleted the questionnaire, please post it to:

Ofsted Learning and Skills Development TeamFloor 7

Aviation House125 KingswayLondonWC2B 6SE.

Download and email

37. This document can be downloaded and completed on your own computer.

When you have completed the questionnaire, please email it to:[email protected] . Please put ‘Common Inspection Framework 2012 consultation’ in the subject line.

http://85.234.135.179/index.php?sid=77156

mailto:[email protected]?subject=Common%20Inpsection%20Framework%202012%20consultation

mailto:[email protected]?subject=Common%20Inpsection%20Framework%202012%20consultation

http://85.234.135.179/index.php?sid=77156



Questionnaire for the Common Inspection Framework 2012 consultation

Confidentiality

The information you provide will be held by us. It will only be used for the purposesof consultation and research to help us to become more effective, shape policies andinform inspection and regulatory practice.

We will treat your identity in confidence, if you disclose it to us. However, we maypublish an organisation’s views.

Are you responding on behalf of an organisation?

Yes please complete Section 1 and the following questionsNo please complete Section 2 and the following questionsNo answer

Section 1

If you are completing the consultation on behalf of an organisation and would like usto consider publishing the views of your organisation, please indicate this below.

Organisation:

I represent:

a GFE/tertiary college an independent specialist college

a sixth form college a local authority

an independent training provider a school

a Next Step contractor an inspection service provider

a higher education institution a not for profit organisation

No answer Other (please tell us)


18



Section 2

Which of the below best describes you? Please tick one option.

I am:

an adult learner/student/participantan employer with an SFA trainingcontract

a parent or careran employer without an SFA trainingcontract

a member of the publican employee of a learning and skillsprovider or college

an inspector a teacher/trainer

Prefer not to say Other (please tell us)

Key headline grades

We propose to continue to judge the provider in terms of its overall effectiveness,but based particularly on judgements relating to:


quality of teaching, learning and assessment

leadership and management (incorporating capacity to improve).

Q1. To what extent do you agree or disagree with our proposed overarching gradeand three key headline grades (paragraph 2)?

Stronglyagree

Agree Neitheragree nordisagree

Disagree Stronglydisagree

Don’t know




Do you have any comments or suggestions?

Outcomes for learners

We propose to judge outcomes for learners by giving particular attention to howwell:

all learners achieve

gaps are narrowing between different groups of learners

learners develop personal, social, and employability skills

learners progress to higher level qualifications and into jobs that meet localand national needs.

Q2. To what extent do you agree or disagree with our proposed approach to judgingoutcomes for learners (paragraphs 3–5)?

Stronglyagree



Don’t know


20




The quality of teaching, learning and assessment

We propose to judge the quality of teaching, learning and assessment bygiving particular attention to how well:

staff demonstrate high expectations, enthuse, engage, support andmotivate learners so that they learn and make progress

staff set challenging tasks, build on and extend learning for all learners

staff have appropriate skills and expertise to provide good quality teaching,learning, assessment and support for each learner

staff assess learners’ progress and provide for a range of needs includingthose learners with learning difficulties and/or disabilities

equality and diversity are promoted through teaching and learning

teaching develops literacy, numeracy, language and functional skills,independent and lifelong learning to support the achievement of learninggoals

learning is effectively supported by appropriate and timely information,and advice and guidance on next steps in training, education andemployment.




Q3. To what extent do you agree or disagree that inspectors should judge the qualityof teaching, learning and assessment as proposed above (paragraphs 6–9)?

Stronglyagree Agree Neitheragree nordisagree

Disagree Stronglydisagree Don’t know


The effectiveness of leadership and management

We propose to evaluate the extent to which leadership and management including, where relevant, governors:

raise expectations, promote ambition for all learners and improve theiroutcomes

improve teaching and learning

ensure the appropriateness of the provision, including the curriculum inmeeting the needs and interests of learners, employers and the local andnational community

deploy resources, including staff, accommodation, facilities andtechnologies to support learning effectively


22



evaluate the provision through monitoring quality including engagementwith users and using their findings to make, promote and sustainimprovement

actively promote equality and diversity, tackle discrimination and narrowany achievement gaps

ensure the safeguarding and well-being of all learners.

Q4. To what extent do you agree or disagree that inspectors should judge theeffectiveness of leadership and management as proposed above (paragraphs 10–17)?

Stronglyagree

Agree Neitheragree nor

disagree


Don’t know





Q5. To what extent do you agree or disagree that capacity to improve is adequatelyrepresented by a judgement on the quality of leadership and management(paragraph 12)?

Stronglyagree



Don’t know



24



Q6. To what extent do you agree or disagree with our proposed approach to judgingequality and diversity (paragraphs 13 and 14)?

Stronglyagree Agree Neitheragree nordisagree

Disagree Stronglydisagree Don’t know


Inspection arrangements

Inspection of subject areas

We propose that we will:

continue to inspect a sample of subject areas, and that subject specialistinspectors increase their focus on teaching and learning

evaluate the outcomes for learners and the teaching and learning insubject areas




award a grade for teaching and learning overall, which will be supportedby our detailed findings on teaching and learning in subject areas

stop writing a report on each of the subject areas sampled throughinspection.

Q7. To what extent do you agree or disagree with our proposals to inspect andreport on subject areas (paragraphs 18 and 19)?

Stronglyagree



Don’t know


Inspection proportionate to risk

We propose to:

adopt a more targeted approach to satisfactory and inadequate providersgiving priority to undertaking monitoring visits, including unannouncedvisits, to satisfactory providers where leadership and management was nobetter than adequate or where the areas for improvement include keyareas such as outcomes


26



bring forward a full inspection if the monitoring visit suggests that theprovider has made limited progress in improving its performance

establish a secure web-based system for gathering the views of learners,

employers and parents/carers between inspections, and to ensure thatthese views are taken into consideration in all risk assessments.

Q8. To what extent do you agree or disagree that we should move to devoting agreater proportion of inspection effort to satisfactory and inadequate providers(paragraphs 20–24)?

Stronglyagree



Don’t know





Dealing w ith requests to inspect providers

We propose that Ofsted will welcome requests for inspection and it will be for HMCI

to decide whether and when to inspect the provider. The Education Bill providesHMCI with additional powers to agree to requests for schools and providers to beinspected and to charge a fee for such an inspection.

Q9. To what extent do you agree or disagree that Ofsted should respond positivelyto most requests for inspection and charge for such inspections (paragraphs 25–29)?

Stronglyagree



Don’t know



28



What did you think of this consultation?

One of the commitments in our strategic plan is to monitor whether our consultations

are accessible to those wishing to take part.

Please tell us what you thought of this consultation by answering the questionsbelow.


Disagree Don’t know

I found the consultationinformation clear and easy to

understand.I found the consultation easy tofind on the Ofsted website.

I had enough information aboutthe consultation topic.

I would take part in a futureOfsted consultation.

How did you hear about this consultation?

Ofsted website

Ofsted News

Ofsted conference

Another organisation (please specify, if known)

Other (please specify) .




Is there anything you would like us to improve on or do differently for futureconsultations? If so, please tell us below.

Thank you for taking part in our consultation.


30



Additional questions about you

Your answers to the following questions will help us to evaluate how successfully we

are communicating messages from inspection to all sections of society. We wouldlike to assure you that all responses are confidential and you do not have to answerevery question.

Please tick the appropriate box.

1. Gender

Female Male

Are you living as the same gender as you were born in?

Yes No

2. Age

Under 14 14–18 19–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65+

3. Ethnic origin

(a) How would you describe your national group?

British or mixed British Northern Irish

English Scottish

Irish Welsh

Other (specify if you wish)




(b) How would you describe your ethnic group?

Asian Mix ed ethnic origin

Bangladeshi Asian and White

Indian Black African and White

Pakistani Black Caribbean and White

Any other Asian background

(specify if you wish)

Any other mixed ethnic background


Black White

African Any White background (specify if you wish)

Caribbean Any other ethnic background

Any other Black background(specify if you wish)

Any other background (specify if you wish)

Chinese

Any Chinese background


4. Sexua l orientation

Heterosexual Lesbian Gay Bisexual

5. Religion/ belief

Buddhist Muslim

Christian (including Church of England, Catholic, Protestantand all other Christiandenominations)

Sikh

Hindu None

Jewish Any other, please state:

6. Disability

Do you consider yourself to be disabled? Yes No

common inspection framework 2012 consultation

Documents